Democrats over the weekend put themselves on track to endorse a pro-gay marriage plank for their convention platform, but neither the party nor the Obama campaign wanted to talk about it Monday.

Six states have legalized gay marriage and three more have legalization measures on the ballot for the fall, but the gradual increase in acceptance of the issue hasn’t done anything to mitigate its political touchiness this election year. Though legalization is seen as a major boost to Democratic efforts to energize the base and stoke fundraising among an active LGBT donor community, wide swaths of voters — including in many swing states — remain opposed.

But even the platform plank — something LGBT activists had sought — sparked some worries. The platform is set to be adopted, after all, at the party convention in North Carolina, which in May passed a referendum banning gay marriage. Obama’s long-sought endorsement of gay marriage came the next day, increasing momentum for the effort.

The 15-member Democratic Party platform draft committee unanimously approved the pro-gay marriage language at its meeting over the weekend in Minneapolis and sent the platform draft to the full platform committee, which meets in Detroit in two weeks.

“I don’t think that we had any issues that were controversial,” one member of the committee said Monday. “I think we were pretty much in sync and in agreement with where we ended up.”

Still, former Rep. Travis Childers, a Mississippi Democrat who was unseated in the 2010 tea party wave, said Blue Dog Democrats like himself would be hesitant to support pro-gay marriage language.

“It is not something that I would agree with, that part of the platform,” Childers said Monday. “I think the conservative Democrats, especially in the South, a great number will disagree with that.”

“The president’s position on this view has been well-chronicled, shall we say,” Earnest said. “But in terms of a specific reaction to the platform, I’d refer you to my colleagues at the DNC.”

But a DNC representative offered no comment in response to questions.

“The president’s personal views on marriage equality are known,” Obama campaign spokeswoman Clo Ewing said, repeating a statement the campaign made last week before the committee met. “The president and the party are committed to crafting a platform that reflects the president’s positions and the values of the party.”

Mitt Romney, who has supported gay issues in the past but never gay marriage, made no specific comment on the platform Monday.

“Gov. Romney has been consistent in his support for traditional marriage,” spokesman Ryan Williams said.

It will take time for conservative Democrats to endorse gay marriage, said Winnie Stachelberg of the Center for American Progress.

“It’s reflective of the issue itself that in fact this is an issue that people have struggled with,” she said. “And I think that elected officials at every level in every place have struggled with it. They’ve gotten to a place as a party where a lot of people feel comfortable with it.”

Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), an openly gay member of Congress, predicted the platform plank won’t hurt Obama — because voters already know his position — or members of Congress up for reelection who are squeamish on the issue.

“If it’s not their position, then I don’t think that voters will take that into account,” Polis said. “Each candidate running for office, whether a Democrat or a Republican, has positions that they stand for. Sometimes those are in agreement with party platform, sometimes not.”

But Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, was less circumspect. Endorsing gay marriage, he said, will cost Democrats in elections up and down the ballot.

“They can kiss the presidential election, the House and now the Senate goodbye,” he said.

Brown acknowledged the move will help Democrats raise money from gay donors but said backers of traditional marriage will be even more motivated.

“He can collect all the money he wants from San Francisco and Hollywood,” he said. “But at the end of the day, San Francisco and Hollywood don’t elect the president of the United States.”

Heather Cronk of Get Equal said Monday that Obama and Democrats must go beyond merely accepting gay marriage.

“Now it’s time for the president to again lead by example and make unmistakably clear that not only does he support LGBT equality when campaign coffers are low, but that he will do everything in his power to make LGBT Americans equal,” Cronk said. “We need more than platitudes and platforms — we need real, concrete change.”

For the record, I do support gay marriage(although very little else of the Democrat Party platform), but are they out of their minds? Gay marriage bans are being passed by comfortable margins whenever they're placed on state ballots, and the Dems want to force a bunch of their vulnerable incumbents to take a position on this issue that will all but doom them in November?

I still have the mailer somewhere in a box from the Obama camp in '08 where he clearly says he's against gay marriage and there are many black clergy agreeing with Obama that "marriage is between a man and a woman". Most black neighborhoods in Los Angeles had signs all over supporting the ban, 90% of the protesters of gay marriage around LAX previous to the vote were Hispanic and Asian, and the voters of CA won on the ban. A lot of his supporters are not happy now. Seems like a silly platform to hitch your star to when the economy is so bad here, but I guess when you have nothing else...

In my opinion, all this is, is a sign of desparation. The Obama strategy is to be all inclusive because he has no record to run on. You know the drill ...

1. The evil 1%;

2. Romney is a rich guy ..

Now we have gay marriage. Before long it will be:

1. People who like the color blue;

2. Left handed people

And the list goes on. What really amazes me about the electorate is that in any other circumstance, by and large, people make decisions about results, eg, I buy Sony's because I have had luck with in the past, etc.

But how is it, that 40%+ can support a man who has a miserable record, or an entire party for that matter who much of the malaise can be traced to them. For the uniformed, much of our current economic woes can be traced back to when the Dems took over congress in 2006. And for that matter, why aren't some Dems crying about the extinction of the blue dogs - it's obvious the liberals ki77ed them.